View Full Version : Ban public smoking...

You want it when?
6th Aug 2001, 17:53
Ban public (street) smoking - just nipped out of the office to buy a sandwich walking back I got a face full of hot ash following a smoker who thought it was a laugh. I don't want your waste products all over me.

Now I drink the odd beer - do you want my waste products all over you? Failing that let me get in front and then I'll "pop" as my two year old charmingly calls it - sufficient to render you unconscious at the very least. :D

You splitter
6th Aug 2001, 18:41

Sorry to hear about your face full...so to speak. Like with most things in public everyone has a duty to respect those others around them. This person was obviously not doing that :mad:

But banning everyone from smoking in the streets could be a touch OTT. Take those infernal car stereos bumping enough bass to register on the richter scale. Does that mean we should ban all listening to music in the car?

6th Aug 2001, 18:58
Yeh - ban 'em.

And those sad bastards with their phones:

"I'm on a mobile phone... I'm walking down the street... "

duh... there's a microphone in the phone and a speaker at the other end, so you DON'T NEED TO SHOUT !!!! :rolleyes:

[email protected]

Squawk 8888
6th Aug 2001, 19:15
YWIW, that incident would have been far less likely to happen if the smoke nazis hadn't been banning it indoors. Don't try lecturing me about health effects of smoke- the bans had nothing to do with health and everything to do with satisfying those control freaks who get their rocks off dictating other peoples' behaviour. Remember that attempt to ban outdoor smoking in a town in the US? Turns out the guy who brought that law in was a child molester, yet more evidence that the anti-smoking zealots are a disturbed bunch.

BTW read a report last week that the air in churches that use incense is 20 times as toxic as the air in the homes of smokers- how about a ban on organized religion? "For the children" naturally. :rolleyes:

6th Aug 2001, 19:28
Yeah, ban it now! In principle I think people may smoke if they want to but don't bother me with your disgusting habit. I don't want to breath your secondary smoke (it kills me too) and I don't want to smell as bad as you guys do. Lets build gas chambers where smokers can "go to town".

PS. I don't want to pay your hospital bill either when you get lung cancer DS. :mad:

6th Aug 2001, 19:41
I think that the point here is that people should be considerate about how they smoke. In my office in Zurich people are pretty much free to smoke anywhere, and so far Ive not heard of any problems. In a similar vein, why do smokers seem to think that its ok to throw their butts on the street. I think it qualifies as litter just as much as anything else. use a bin please. ;) :D :p

Squawk 8888
6th Aug 2001, 19:59
Mishandled, that's how it used to be here until the politicians decided to use smokers the way Hitler used jews- we're a convenient whipping boy for them to drum up support. So instead of people working it out among themselves we've got whole forests being decimated to print all the new laws.

Prettyboy, if you want a law against every annoyance that you happen to dislike, then perhaps we should have legislation against breaking wind, chewing with one's mouth open and sporting the "mullet" haircut.

PS if I should happen to find myself among the 1 in 25 smokers who actually comes down with lung cancer or any other allegedly smoking-related illness, I'll gladly fork over the medical bills provided that (a) every obese person pays for the treatment of all his health woes and (b) I get a refund of the $800/year I pay in tobacco taxes.

You want it when?
6th Aug 2001, 20:05
My local town has banned smoking in the indoor shopping mall (and it works). I hear it's going the same way as in the US - no smoking in public places. Rightly or wrongly it's a pretty nasty habit as irrepsective of the health risk what about the stink?

Having said that - no smoking areas in resturants is like having a no peeing area in a pool - pretty pointless.

gravity victim
6th Aug 2001, 20:20
I very,very much hope that nobody on pprune would have the appallingly bad taste to attempt to retail that totally uncceptable, indefensible joke about how to get 25 jews into a Mini....

SLF 999
6th Aug 2001, 20:56
As a smoker, I try to respect the rights of others and not make them uncomfortable with the smoke, ash or fag ends.
Banning smoking in Public places is all fair enough given a reasoned argument, cinemas , resturants, planes, buses etc.

Banning it outside I think it is OTT, ok smoking has been linked with a lot of unpleasant diseases, but what about the carcenogens (sorry for the spelling) in Diesel fuel, are we going to ban that ?, Yes we can all take the arguments to silly lengths, but if you ban it where are we addicts allowed to get our hit??

Smoking is worth too much money to the gov to ban it, and please dont respond with the health argument where smokers cost the NHS money, sorry doesnt stand up when you look at the tax paid by smokers minus NHS costs for smoking related illness, still leaves a surplus.
Sorry Ill get off my soap box now. :(

6th Aug 2001, 22:16
I am a non smoker, and, have no objection to anybody else smoking.

but I do object to them making me smoke !

[ 06 August 2001: Message edited by: gandelf ]

Squawk 8888
6th Aug 2001, 22:31
Well, gendelf et al, you're gonna love it when they go after *your* favourite vice. The health freaks are now agitating for excise taxes on "junk food", usually defined as whatever kind of foods they don't happen to like. Some are even talking about getting employers to force their workers to exercise every day. Reminds me of this quote:

"Nutrition is not a private matter. Everybody has a duty to be healthy." That line came from "Health Through Proper Eating", published in the 1930s by the Hitler Youth Movement.

6th Aug 2001, 23:01
Pretty Boy,

"PS. I don't want to pay your hospital bill either when you get lung cancer DS"

You don't say where you are from but, if it's UK, and my data is out of date - referencing when it was 2 quid a pack, the tobaco revenue to the government paid the entire National Health Service bill!


Yep, agree - when I'm home in UK on leave, I go to the supermarket with my Mum, who has quit, and don't smoke in her car. I get out of the car and light up on the way across the car park and find a "no smoking" sign on the entrance to the "mall" - no problem - except that there's no "butt bin", and dog-ends all around the entrance! I got no problem with a smoking ban in the mall, but for ****s sake, give us somewhere to dump the buts apart from our pockets! Heathrow Airport is "smoke free" (apart from a few locations), and they have "butt bins" at the terminal entrances!


Right - the politicians grab the anti-smonking band wagon, but omit to say where they'd dump the tax burden if everyone in UK stopped smoking (maybe up the price of petrol yet again - or beer? - "the usual suspects")

As for laws against everything I don't agree with - you could give a good case for making male homosexuals illegal (again), and withdrawing their rights to NHS treatment if they catch AIDS (no - I'm not homophobic, nor am I "smokaphobic")

Gravity, - Please email me with the answer - nothing against Jews, but it sounds a laugh!


Sounds like you have up-to-date data on the point I was making above. So it's still the case? (with fags at over 4 quid, I expected it would be!)

If you anti-smokers want to have a separate part of a restaurant, or a pub, or for that matter an aeroplane, then "commercial forces" will force the resteranteur, publican, airline, to give you what you want. Will the bl00dy "faceless wonders" get off the smokers' backs, looking for a "cheap vote" and do something about things that kill citizens far more reliably, like muggers, terrorists, drug pushers, etc - Oh, hitting the smoker is easier to enforce . . . :eek:

Mac the Knife
6th Aug 2001, 23:13
"...the tax paid by smokers minus NHS costs for smoking related illness, still leaves a surplus. "

Sorry SLF 999 but I think thats pretty unlikely. Where did you get your figures from?

Smokin' Mac

6th Aug 2001, 23:40
Yes Squawk8888, my post was perhaps a bit immature and a legal ban on public smoking is not possible nor perhaps desirable. The other annoyances you mentioned; "breaking wind, chewing with one's mouth open" is not sociably acceptable, at least not where I am from. If you would concider smoking as repulsive as for instance "breaking wind" (and I definately see similarities, both being inconciderate), it puts smoking in a different perspective.

It is not everybodys right to smoke, I believe it is everybodys right not to be bothered by it. Why is it wrong that smokers must go out of their way to "do their thing" making sure they don't annoy others?

[ 06 August 2001: Message edited by: PrettyBoy ]

Squawk 8888
7th Aug 2001, 00:03
ExSim, you are absolutely correct that commercial forces will solve the problem- many restaurants and fast-food chains in North America went smokeless long before the politicians stuck their noses in. The pattern was neither unreasonable nor unexpected- those establishments that catered to families with small children banned smoking, while those that sprang up to attract office workers on smoke breaks (including virtally every coffee shop in Toronto) had an ashtray on every table.

Prettyboy- I'll gladly agree to not lighting up on your property just as soon as you agree to not dictating behaviour off your property.

tony draper
7th Aug 2001, 01:03
What the hell will you people do for your last three minutes if your ever in front of a firing squad. :(

Silly question, probably ask the commandant if his chaps were using smokless cartridges.

[ 06 August 2001: Message edited by: tony draper ]

7th Aug 2001, 01:42
There are smokers who smoke without bothering anyone else. There are drinkers who drink without bothering anyone else. I suppose there are people who drive Honda Civics without bothering anyone, though I've never seen that personally.

What's really needed is a ban on louts, ash-flicking or other varieties. While I endorse that sentiment whole-heartedly, I fear it would be impossible to implement. Unless we adopt the practice from that old Star Trek (might have been Twilight Zone) episode, where every trangression however minor, was a capital offence. Ooops sorry forgot, capital punishment is not PC either (too many damn threads here !).

I remember when it was illegal to be a fag, not smoke one. Oh shyt, I've done it again.

Squawk 8888
7th Aug 2001, 05:33
Tiger, that was Star Trek TNG- Boy Wonder got sentenced to death for stepping into a flowerbed. Hope the lawmakers in Singapore didn't catch that one- they might get ideas :eek: BTW do they still jail gum-chewers there?

7th Aug 2001, 06:04
I come from a family where the head of the household was a very heavy smoker. He still is, despite it having badly affected his health and him being advised for years by many different doctors that the root cause of his poor health is smoking.

As a child I never objected to him messing up his own body but I used to worry about him because he was my father. I hated the smell of the smoke on my clothes, especially in the winter when it wasn't possible to escape outdoors so easily. I did object to the fact that he used to complain if we as kids coughed and spluttered because of his foul cigarette smoke in the house. Later, I argued with him when he visited my house and left his foul-smelling rubbish for me or my wife to clean up because of his "right to smoke" and could not see why he should have to go outside or tidy up after making my house stink too.

Now he is almost housebound, I hate how his smoke has also messed up my mother's health and yet he still will not stop. Has anyone noiced that smokers feel the cold? Many of them really hate having that window opened and so my poor mother suffers in silence.

What am I supposed to say to my four year old daughter when she asks why "Granpa smells so bad?" and refuses to sit on his knee.

I think that the main problem with cigarettes is the packaging. They need to be put in a much larger box, which the smoker puts over his head whilst smoking, thus concentrating the smoke exactly where it is wanted. The gases are much more effective in confined spaces.

Smoking? Should it be banned? No, it's a personal right, just like any other form of self abuse, but please just don't do it near me or my children or expect to do it in my house. After all, it's my right to breathe the air as nature intended it to be.


7th Aug 2001, 06:36
Under the Kyoto Agreement, for greenhouse gas purposes, CO2 has been classified as an emission. Y'all better watch what yer exhalin' y'hear.

7th Aug 2001, 08:24
The reason smokers feel the cold is because smoking has a vasoconstricting effect. Hence, circulation is affected. This is part of the reason why smokers figure highly in limb amputation statistics. In addition, smoking results in the incidence of fatty plaques in arteries (atherosclerosis), leading to heart disease....just thought I'd cheer you smokers up a little!

7th Aug 2001, 08:34
I too am a reformed smoker and it was the best thing I ever did.
I can climb stairs without stopping for a rest.
I can actually taste my food to the point that a Macdonald's cheeseburger is now a taste sensation.
I am no longer a social leper and have the ears and respect of the majority when I get on my soap box on this subject.
I can afford more non-taxable drugs.
And overall, my life has brightened up considerably because the sun actually shines from my @rse.


SLF 999
7th Aug 2001, 15:47

The data below comes from uk government websites, as well as looking at ASH and Forest websites (anti and pro smoking)

Treating smoking-related diseases costs the NHS approx 1.7 billion a year. By contrast, tobacco taxation raises more than 7 billion a year.

[ 07 August 2001: Message edited by: SLF 999 ]

Squawk 8888
7th Aug 2001, 16:28
SLF, don't forget that those treatment costs for allegedly "smoking-related" diseases are probably exaggerated. The antis like to inflate the figures by including things like cancer and heart attacks among smokers in their 70s and older. Indeed, the single largest risk factor for cancer is age- more people are dying of cancer now because they're not dying of other things when they're younger.

Vortex what...ouch!
7th Aug 2001, 20:50

If you couldn't climb stairs without stopping for breath I think you have more problems than smoking :D

"ducks behind wall" :)

tony draper
7th Aug 2001, 21:57
Item on the news today about banning lunchtime drinking, ie the pie and pint, subjecting staff to breathalysers on their return to work, what are your thoughts on that?.
I get the distinct impression reading the different threads, that people here are fond of pulling a cork as they say.
I have to admit that I still smoke I have tried on numerous occasions to give up so I gave up giving up.
It is my only vice, I no longer drink and seldom sniff around women now, so smoking and pulling oneself are the only vices I have left.
I also get the distinct impression that people who have smoked in the past but given it up tend to be much more virilent in their condemnation, rather like reformed ladies of the night are always the biggest prudes. :(

[ 07 August 2001: Message edited by: tony draper ]

8th Aug 2001, 00:56
Yes Tony, the reformed ones are the most vociferous. They have to be in order to continually convince themselves that they don't really need a smoke ! :)

Squawk 8888
8th Aug 2001, 01:04
There's also quite a puritanical streak in most of the anti-smokers (not to be confused with non-smokers, with whom I have no quarrel). Such people tend to be rabidly opposed to allowing any form of pleasure, lest it incite desires in themselves with which they are not comfortable. I find it interesting that the most vocal anti in one suburb of Washington (they attempted an outdoor ban) turned out to be a child molester- it fits the pattern, not unlike priests who molest altar boys, gay-bashers who are latent homosexuals and whoremongers who try to stamp out porn. Psych 101.

tony draper
8th Aug 2001, 01:09
Heh heh , Oh boy, you gonna be in trouble now Mr 8 ;)

8th Aug 2001, 01:32
Mishandled, and any one elso who mentioned it! I don't mind people smoking, so long as I don't have to breathe in the dregs, but I really do object to smoking cigarette buts lying everywhere - a bit like finding chewing gum that was once stuck to the underside of a table stuck to your leg!

As for the lunch time thing, Draper, you're paid to work, not to drink, so get on with it. Plenty of spare time for that...

[ 07 August 2001: Message edited by: Baggy ]

tony draper
8th Aug 2001, 01:43
As I said in my post Mr B, I no longer drink,
Don't suppose the pie and pint thing is all that common nowadays anyway.
Lots of industries would have sent anybody smelling of drink home , that has been the case for a long time, it was just the introduction of the boss weilding a breathalyser I though would have caused comment.

Squawk 8888
8th Aug 2001, 03:51
Well, Tony, if the legal climate stateside can compel yank employers to make office workers pee in a cup to keep their jobs then anything goes. The whole tobacco crusade is just like the War on Drugs (AKA War on Fun). Right now the busybodies are drug-testing schoolchildren, barring kids from restaurants that allow smoking, advocating taxes on junk food, taking children away from parents who smoke the occasional joint. If all you get is a breathalyzer test consider yourself lucky- enjoying oneself is considered subversive on this side of the pond. In the US they say it's "for the children" while in Canada we're told it's for the sake of our "universal" :rolleyes: health-care system.

BTW a bit of advice if you're confronted with drug-testing- a local school here proposed it, I advised some of the students that if it should happen I would gladly assist them in cracking the lab's database (I wrote the sofware most of them use) and altering the principal's results :D

8th Aug 2001, 03:51
So, come on then, how do you get 25 Jews in a mini?

8th Aug 2001, 11:42

My impression is that the only fanatical opinions on this thread comes from you, not from all rabid non-smokers who are getting tired of suffering from your filthy habits. I don't want to stop you from smoking (even if I could), I just find it a bit selfish to impose your junk on others just because it is your right.

8th Aug 2001, 12:00
Didn't they arrest a pregnant woman and charge her with harming her unborn child because she was seen drinking in a public place in the US.

As for smoking, I have no problem with smokers or smoking, but prefer it if I don't have to suffer too much. I can't understand why certain smokers think it is amusing to blow smoke in my face if I show even a mild distaste for it.

As for whether the Health Service should cover costs, of course, it should. Why should one indulgence be outside the frame when illness or injury caused by other hobbies or activities or social pursuits aren't.

Don D Cake
8th Aug 2001, 16:01
If YWIW had popped down the road to buy a sandwich and some lout had spilled coke over him and laughed would this post have read "Ban public soft drinking", I think not. Banning everything in public is not going to stop gits annoying you for their pleasure.

As for smoking in public, if there is no alternative eg public transport/libraries/my mum's house etc I agree with the ban. If there is an alternative eg restaurants/pubs etc then no ban. I smoke. If a restaurant is non smoking I won't go in so I don't want non smokers moaning when I light up in my nice smoky diner. I wouldn't demand steak in a vegetarian restaurant so why can't the non smokers go to the non smoking restaurants?

Apparently the disease killing most smokers now is pneumonia from having to stand outside in the winter.


8th Aug 2001, 21:49
Tony, I'll read more carefully in the future!! I didn't really mean you anyway, but those who do consider it acceptable to drink during the working day.

The boss weilding a breathalyser would probably be the one trying to keep it furthest away from themselves!! :D

Miss B. xx